Public toilets, wastewater, hikers' rescue and more

Public toilet costs are loo-dicrous

Just when you think our cash strapped city government can’t find more creative ways to waste money, along come the Portland Loos (“Issue with public toilets: Who will clean them?,” Local, April 29). [A cost of] $200,000 each for essentially “half baths” (no shower or bathtub)? [And] $21,000 a year (almost $60 a day) each in maintenance? Couldn’t you build a free-standing cinder-block building for a lot less, and can’t you find a cleaning service in the private sector who would gladly take that job for a lot less? Ridiculous! — Eric Witt, San Diego

Thirsting for answers

In response to “Tide turns in favor of recycling wastewater” (April 29): Deborah Brennan reports that public opinion now favors drinking recycled wastewater by 73 percent — nearly the exact opposite of just a few years ago. Two thoughts come to mind.

First, all city staff and elected officials should immediately begin to drink recycled wastewater to show their belief and leadership in this arena. This approach would demonstrate that San Diego’s government is unlike those in Congress who would exempt themselves from policies they impose on the general public.

Second, the reporter should follow up and find out if this is the identical survey used in the previous poll, whether the sampling method was identical and whether any other bias was introduced into the current poll. Such a dramatic change should have triggered the reporter’s smell test.

Toilet-to-tap may well be the best thing that ever happened to water conservation (next to desalination) but let the public have an honest assessment and a leadership willing to go where their rhetoric suggests. — Joe Nalven, Poway

Rescue raises questions

In response to “Lost hikers rescued by Sheriff’s Department” (utsandiego.com, April 28): It seems somewhat weird that two 23-year-old men with working cellphones, out on a hike, become lost late in the evening and need 26 city/county/federal employees to assemble and rescue them.

Why did they wait until after dark to head down the peak? They’re out there without water and snacks? It wasn’t a bitterly cold night; they couldn’t wait until morning to hike down, keeping in touch with family/authorities by cellphone? Were either of them injured? Who authorized this outrageously expensive “rescue?” They were hungry? Most people sleep at night. I’m sure the overtime paid to the rescuers was more than some people make in a month.

Our family has hiked Cuyamaca for decades; it’s not difficult to navigate in daylight. Seems to me they could have hunkered down for the night and found their way back home the following morning. After all, it’s daylight around 5:30 a.m. Nine hours on a hilltop doesn’t seem life-threatening. There has to be more to this story to create such a dramatic rescue, especially one that would have possibly involved the rescue helicopter had conditions been right. Something just doesn’t fly with this rescue, no pun intended. — Shannon Fiore, San Diego

A drain on resources

I am sure the Chamber of Commerce types in Borrego Springs are pleased with your recent series of articles about the Borrego Valley (“Solar power plant debuts in Borrego,” Local, April 27). I am equally sure they are pleased and relieved as well by the fact that all of them assiduously avoid any mention of Borrego’s dirty little secret: The Borrego Valley Aquifer is being rapidly depleted, there is no solution in sight, and the community will soon run out of water. — Dennis W. Dickinson, Borrego Springs